News & Current EventsDiscuss The Big Fat GOP Budget Lie at the General Forum; First, a brief history on federal spending in order to put things in perspective...
Between 1947 and 1980, overall federal ...

First, a brief history on federal spending in order to put things in perspective...

Quote:

Between 1947 and 1980, overall federal spending averaged 18.3 percent and spending levels remained relatively stable during these years, especially after 1951, as you can see...

Quote:

After Ronald Reagan’s inauguration in 1981, federal spending began drifting up, averaging 21.9 percent of GDP during the Reagan-Bush-41 years. Most of that growth went to a mushrooming Defense budget as President Reagan issued warnings about a supposedly expanding Soviet Empire.

Sidebar: Why is it, all our current messes seemed to have started with Ronald Reagan?

Alright, back to the GOP lie...

Quote:

The Reagan-Bush-I spending binge left the Clinton Administration with difficult choices on how to reduce the then-record budget deficit. Despite pressure from liberals who favored a more aggressive strategy for addressing the nation’s needs, the Clinton team reduced federal spending as a percentage of GDP every year, getting it down to 18 percent by 2000, the lowest level of federal spending relative to GDP since 1974

As you can see, Clinton reduced federal spending every year he was in office.

But then along came Bush...

Quote:

Then came the Bush-II administration, which completely reversed this trend with major spending increases for the military and intelligence services to conduct the post-9/11 “war on terror” and the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. George W. Bush also pushed through a new prescription drug bill.

...who started spending like a drunken liberal.

As far as Obama spending goes, other than the bailouts, there has been no spike or considerable uptick in spending .

Quote:

The most pronounced shift in budget calculations is that federal revenue has dropped from 20.35 percent of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in 2000 – when the U.S. government was running a surplus – to 14.41 percent of GDP today, with the projected deficit for fiscal 2011 at about $1.5 trillion.

A fair-minded review of the budget shows, too, that most of the contributions from the spending side of the ledger have almost nothing to do with President Barack Obama or what is typically described as “reckless spending” in Washington on domestic priorities.

The only “discretionary” item in the budget that has seen any significant increase in recent years is Defense. The rest of these “discretionary” categories – Education, Transportation, Environment, Agriculture, etc. – have actually decreased as a percent of GDP from around 4 percent in the early 1980s to less than 3 percent today

I want all you righties to read that again! The ONLY discretionary spending that has seen any increase, is in the defense budget. So all you people bitchin' about Obama's spending are just blowing smoke up everyone's ass!

Quote:

...given today’s struggling economy and the projections for federal spending to stabilize and come down — assuming the economy recovers — it should be clear the United States doesn’t face an immediate spending crisis.

The nation does, however, face a revenue crisis. Largely because of George W. Bush’s tax cuts, which he justified by noting that the government was running a surplus in 2000, federal revenues have dropped from 20.35 percent of GDP in the last year of the Clinton administration to 14.41 percent today.

So, no matter what spending programs get cut – even if spending were rolled back to around 21 percent of GDP, in line with the levels of spending under recent Republican administrations – the United States won’t stanch the flood of red ink without getting revenue up to about the same share of GDP

Now let's review:

federal spending was relatively stable from 1920-1980

that all changed with the election of Ronald Reagan as spending increased dramitically

Clinton decreased spending every year he was in office

and THAT all ended when Bush 43 took over

and by the time Bush 43 was over, Obama was handed a train wreck

The Following User Says Thank You to Billo_Really For This Useful Post:

Congress controls spending, not the President.
How about if you contrast your charts to congressional control and let me know what you think about that.

Trying to hijack the thread?

Historical evidence shows we have a revenue problem.

If you want to concentrate on just the role Congress played in all this, then it was a completely republican created problem. I don't think you want to go there. But I do think, you will do whatever you can, to change the subject of this thread. Then go to one of your own and bitch about people not addressing your OP.

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Billo_Really For This Useful Post:

If you want to concentrate on just the role Congress played in all this, then it was a completely republican created problem. I don't think you want to go there. But I do think, you will do whatever you can, to change the subject of this thread. Then go to one of your own and bitch about people not addressing your OP.

First, a brief history on federal spending in order to put things in perspective...

Sidebar: Why is it, all our current messes seemed to have started with Ronald Reagan?

Alright, back to the GOP lie...

As you can see, Clinton reduced federal spending every year he was in office.

But then along came Bush...

...who started spending like a drunken liberal.

As far as Obama spending goes, other than the bailouts, there has been no spike or considerable uptick in spending .

I want all you righties to read that again! The ONLY discretionary spending that has seen any increase, is in the defense budget. So all you people bitchin' about Obama's spending are just blowing smoke up everyone's ass!

Now let's review:

federal spending was relatively stable from 1920-1980

that all changed with the election of Ronald Reagan as spending increased dramitically

Clinton decreased spending every year he was in office

and THAT all ended when Bush 43 took over

and by the time Bush 43 was over, Obama was handed a train wreck

This is exactly what irritates the hell out of me. Listening to these holier then thow self delusional hypocrites. Always blaming Democrat spending for their governments possible default. The numbers don't lie. They screw the pooch with the "starve the beast theory", or the "trickle down theory". Basically whatever theory keeps them from being responsible. Then they turn and blame towards the other side when it blows up in their faces. In everyones faces. You never see them cop to their role except by saying "Well both sides are bad". No, when it comes to managing the governments coffers the republicans play too many theoretical games with the countries finances. You would think the party who claims conservatism wouldn't play these games with our money.

someone starts a thread & points out that during the clinton years that the federal government went from spending just over 21% of gdp down to 18% of gdp & then claims we have a revenue problem...
nevermind that the federal government is projected to spend more than 25% of gdp this year
capping spending at 18% of gdp would cure our problem because spending is clearly the issue; not revenue & even the op of this thread makes that point quite clear

__________________"Free people are not equal & equal people are not free." --- Mackinac Center for Public Policy